Any guesses as to why 42mm is more popular?

I think most ppl are looking for the larger size; however, I prefer the 38mm on my wrist. The 42mm looked ridiculous on my small wrist b/c of the thickness.
 
KPOM said:
New steel 38mm watch orders are shipping in 2-3 weeks, and sport in 3-5 weeks, while 42mm orders are still in the 5-7 or even "July" category. It seems that the 42mm is a lot more popular than the 38mm. Any ideas why?

The 38mm seems to be a better fit for most women, and I'd guess at least 1/3 of men. Even given a 70/30 split between men and women as far as buyers, that would suggest something much closer to a 50/50 split between 38mm and 42mm orders. I know big watches are in fashion right now, but the 38mm is about the size of a traditional men's watch, and somewhat on the large side for a women's watch.

Is it the size of the screen (i.e. people think it's easier to read)? Is it the same phenomena that led to the Galaxy Note and iPhone Plus? Something else?
Click to expand...
1. Apple Watch owners at this time are probably dominantly male, given that males are more likely to get up at 2am to place an order for a gadget no one has ever seen or used in person. When you can actually walk into an Apple store, try one on and walk out with a brand new Apple Watch then the numbers will shift dramatically.

2. For most males, the 42mm is the right size - and it looks fine on many if not most women as well.

3. There's definitely a number of people who opted for the 42mm when the 38mm would have looked better on them (based on the "show your apple watch" thread). I think that comes mostly down to the "bigger must be better" mentality like you suggested.
 
I settled on the 38 because the 42 was way too big for my wrist, but I would have preferred the 42 if it had fit. My mom got the 42, and she wouldn't even consider the 38 because it was too small. The screen size difference might not be that great, but when you have older eyes, every millimeter counts. And we both have the text set to as big and as bold as they go. And I still have trouble making out most of the text on the 38. I love the watch for its activity tracking, but as far as notifications go, it's mostly glance at the watch, see what the notification is, and if it's something I want to read, reach for the phone. :(
 
Kavier said:
The 42mm looked ridiculous on my small wrist b/c of the thickness.
Click to expand...

That's the part I don't get. According to official dimensions, the 42mm body including sensor is 12.46mm thick and the 38mm body including sensor is 12.20mm thick. Only a difference of 00.26mm. Wouldn't the shorter but nearly the same thickness 38mm look more bulbous? And people say it looks more "watchie" than "smartwatch"?
 
I have smaller wrists and thinner hands. The 38mm fits me like a watch should and that is what I wanted. It's not hard to read text on at all... that is just an exaggeration. It is close to the same size as most watches so it really isn't tiny either. It is smaller than most smart watches.

The 42mm would look ridiculous on me. I don't want to look like a kid wearing my dad's watch. On the other hand my watch (38mm SS ML) WILL NOT fit over my bosses hand unless he removes the band and re-attaches it on his wrist. The 42mm would likely fit him much better. I don't mean tight fit... it literally would not go over his knuckles.
 
Sanlitun said:
Bigger battery and better screen (higher DPI).
Click to expand...

The battery and display were my primary drivers since either size looked pretty terrific.

(FYI, the PPI is actually the same on both @ 326)

Cory Bauer said:
2. For most males, the 42mm is the right size - and it looks fine on many if not most women as well.
Click to expand...

I got my wife a 42mm, that's the size she wanted, and that was site unseen (though she has a decent number of watches to use as a reference). When I mentioned more display area and a better battery for the slight size increase (and that the depth/thickness was about the same) it was no contest - particularly since she kind of likes an oversized watch.

For me (actually trying hers on several times), it looks good, can't imagine the 38mm looking better, and the 42mm has a couple of better technical specs (see way above).

----------
HippieMagic said:
I have smaller wrists and thinner hands. The 38mm fits me like a watch should and that is what I wanted.

The 42mm would look ridiculous on me.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if the 38mm just looks better, then that's the best choice. I wouldn't sacrifice how it "wears" for the slightly improved battery and readability. :cool:
 
Actually, I think some have counted plain pixels x and y and realised the 42mm has more estate to offer than the 38mm, then if they would suit that size they went for it.

Personally I think the 38 would like tiny, the 42 is fairly tiny anyway.
 
The 42mm model was closer to the size of the watch I was wearing previously, so I chose something that already fit my comfort and style choices from previous watches. I suspect that this was the case for many other buyers, particularly men. I haven't seen any official research on the subject, but the common perception is that the "gadget geek" demographic is comprised of more males than females. Men's watches on average, tend to be larger. I would suspect this is what accounts for most of the 80/20 split in sales.

FWIW I bought a 42mm model, and it's about the same size, possibly slightly smaller than my previous watch, and my wife bought a 38mm, which is a bit bigger than her previous watch.
 
solarguy17 said:
Why? Maybe guys like me don't have monsterous (or large) wrists and feel like the 38 is more comfortable to were because it is SLIGHTLY smaller.
Click to expand...

well probably because I dont usually see guys with watches that small. Not saying there aren't any guys out there with small watches but from my experience most guys usually opt for something bigger than 38mm. Not saying there's anything wrong with either size it's just I usually see men wearing a bigger watch.

and the 42mm isn't anywhere near a "monsterous" or large watch so I dont think you need anywhere near a "monsterous" or large wrists to wear or feel comfortable with a 42 mm.
 
I never even considered the 38mm. The watch I currently wear is about the same size as the 42mm, it's a mens diving watch.

I've worn oversized watches still I started wearing watches aged 10 so they just feel right. The 38mm on me would be ridiculous.

Oh and my wrist is 150mm.
 
It's because men are more likely to be early adopters of new technology. I'm not being sexist either. I had marketing classes on this just a few years ago. It's just data. I think it's slowly changing but men still dominate the lines any time I've queued for Apple gear. Men also tend to need a larger watch face to match their larger wrists. It's not rocket surgery! I think over time the mix will stabilize but 42mm will always be the more popular model.

For the people making comments about many men not needing the 42mm size, I just have to say that I've seen some pretty huge watches out there on the kids today. Right after my try-on appointment this past weekend we stopped by the Fossil store so my wife could look at some purse bag things. Many of the watches in there were MASSIVE! And I saw a lot of teen boys in there checking them out and they also had huge watches on already. Luckily the 42mm looks perfect on my statistically average male wrist. I think at some point in the next few years Apple will definitely come out with a larger size because some guys really need it and the fashion trend is for larger watches.
 
KPOM said:
Is it the size of the screen (i.e. people think it's easier to read)? Is it the same phenomena that led to the Galaxy Note and iPhone Plus? Something else?
Click to expand...
I chose the 42mm version because I'm a big fan of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. In the story, there is an alien race that built a computer to discover the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything. The answer that came out of that computer was, "42." Obviously it was answering the question of which Apple Watch to choose. ;)
 
JayLenochiniMac said:
That's the part I don't get. According to official dimensions, the 42mm body including sensor is 12.46mm thick and the 38mm body including sensor is 12.20mm thick. Only a difference of 00.26mm. Wouldn't the shorter but nearly the same thickness 38mm look more bulbous? And people say it looks more "watchie" than "smartwatch"?
Click to expand...

To me it doesn't. The 42mm spanned my entire wrist which is what made the thickness so much more noticeable.
 
I was on the tube this week and paid attention to the watches people were wearing. All men and most women under 35-ish who wore watches had larger ones.

The only people wearing small watches were ladies over 40-ish.

So 75%+ of the people I saw wearing watches who looked like candidates for a smart watch were wearing larger watches already.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top